Search

Main menu

EPA releases locations of high-hazard coal ash dumps; most are in the South

After initially saying it would not release the information due to "security concerns," the Environmental Protection Agency relented Monday and disclosed the locations of the nation's 44 "high hazard" coal ash dump sites.

These are the surface impoundments holding the waste from coal-fired power plants where a failure of the containment structure -- like the one that occurred last December at the Tennessee Valley Authority's Kingston plant in Roane County, Tenn. -- could kill significant numbers of people.

The South is home to 24 of the 44 high-hazard sites. North Carolina has the most of these sites at 12, followed by Arizona with nine and Kentucky with seven. Meanwhile, North Carolina-based Duke Energy is the utility with the most facilities on the list, with 10. All of those are located in the company's home state.

"The presence of liquid coal ash impoundments near our homes, schools and business could pose a serious risk to life and property in the event of an impoundment rupture," said EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson. "By compiling a list of these facilities, EPA will be better able to identify and reduce potential risks by working with states and local emergency responders."

Coal ash dump sites contain dangerous levels of arsenic, lead, mercury and other toxins that can contaminate drinking water or inundate nearby communities, as happened last year in Tennessee.

The following are the sites on the EPA's list, arranged by state (click on chart for a larger image):The list was compiled with information submitted to EPA by the electric utilities in response to the agency's March 9, 2009 information request. The EPA says the 44 units will receive priority attention as the agency continues to assess the safety of the nation's coal ash impoundments.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) pressed the EPA to release the information, arguing that it was essential for people to know the sites' locations so they could press local authorities to act to make them safer. At a press conference held earlier this month, she complained of feeling "muzzled" by the agency.

EPA has promised to issue a proposed regulation for the management of coal combustion wastes by Dec. 31, 2009. At the present time, these facilities are not federally regulated.

In North Carolina, state Rep. Pricey Harrison (D-Greensboro) has proposed a bill that would impose tougher state regulations on these facilities. However, it faces stiff opposition from the state's utilities, which are major political donors and powerful lobbying forces [pdf].

(Image of home inundated by December 2008 TVA ash spill from the company's aerial footage)

it's not just about air pollution and carbon emissions. if coal companies are only asked to "reduce emissions" then they'll put all their waste in the South, in our rivers and our lakes. epa cuts out public participation for people who live nearby, like here in east tennessee. if all we talk about is air pollution, all we'll get is zero-emissions "clean coal technology" and even more waste stored in hazardous ground and water sites, disproportionately in the South. Washington has one policy on hazardous waste: dump it on foreigners, Indians, or the South. this is toxic waste trafficking with no concern for human rights, clean water, or public health.

Support

Share this article

Related Posts

With a fight underway in Congress over protecting more U.S. waterways from industrial pollution, Environment America has issued a report looking at the millions of dollars spent on politics each year by polluters. Besides the Kansas-based oil and chemical giant, other big-spending polluters include Southern meat processors and an energy company.

Communities in West Virginia and Alabama are among those that have experienced fiery disasters when trains hauling crude oil derailed, and the government expects more incidents like these due to the oil shale drilling boom. So why are industry interests blocking new regulations that aim to protect the public?

The Atlanta-based utility giant is in the news for funding a controversial researcher whose work has been used to cast doubt on the overwhelming scientific consensus that human activity is driving global warming. It isn't the first time the company has been involved in promoting questionable climate science.

While governors in the Southeast are pushing for offshore oil and gas drilling in the Atlantic, elected officials in other East Coast states are fighting the proposal, saying the potential cost is too great.